Speech by Iranian
President Mahmoud Ahmadi-Nejad at the United Nations on September 19, 2006.

What
afflicts humanity today is certainly not compatible with human
dignity; the Almighty has not created human beings so that they
could transgress against others and oppress them.

By
causing war and conflict, some are fast expanding their domination,
accumulating greater wealth and usurping all the resources, while
others endure the resulting poverty, suffering and misery. Some
seek to rule the world relying on weapons and threats, while others
live in perpetual insecurity and danger.

Some
occupy the homeland of others, thousands of kilometers away from
their borders, interfere in their affairs and control their oil
and other resources and strategic routes, while others are bombarded
daily in their own homes; their children murdered in the streets
and alleys of their own country and their homes reduced to rubble.

Such
behavior is not worthy of human beings and runs counter to the
Truth, to justice and to human dignity. The fundamental question
is that under such conditions, where should the oppressed seek
justice? Who, or what organization defends the rights of the oppressed,
and suppresses acts of aggression and oppression? Where is the
seat of global justice?

A
brief glance at a few examples of the most pressing global issues
can further illustrate the problem.

By
causing war and conflict, some are
fast expanding their domination,
accumulating greater wealth and
usurping all the resources, while others
endure the resulting poverty, suffering
and misery... Such behavior is not
worthy of human beings and runs
counter to the Truth, to justice and
to human dignity.

A.
The unbridled expansion of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons

Some
powers proudly announce their production of second and third generations
of nuclear weapons. What do they need these weapons for? Is the
development and stockpiling of these deadly weapons designed to
promote peace and democracy? Or, are these weapons, in fact, instruments
of coercion and threat against other peoples and governments?
How long should the people of the world live with the nightmare
of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons?

What
bounds the powers producing and possessing these weapons? How
can they be held accountable before the international community?
And, are the inhabitants of these countries content with the waste
of their wealth and resources for the production of such destructive
arsenals?

Is it not possible to rely on justice, ethics and wisdom instead
of these instruments of death? Aren't wisdom and justice more
compatible with peace and tranquility than nuclear, chemical and
biological weapons? If wisdom, ethics and justice prevail, then
oppression and aggression will be uprooted, threats will wither
away and no reason will remain for conflict. This is a solid proposition
because most global conflicts emanate from injustice, and from
the powerful, not being contented with their own rights, striving
to devour the rights of others.

People
across the globe embrace justice and are willing to sacrifice
for its sake.

Would
it not be easier for global powers to ensure their longevity and
win hearts and minds through the championing of real promotion
of justice, compassion and peace, than through continuing the
proliferation of nuclear and chemical weapons and the threat of
their use?

The
experience of the threat and the use of nuclear weapons is before
us. Has it achieved anything for the perpetrators other than exacerbation
of tension, hatred and animosity among nations?

If
wisdom, ethics and justice prevail,
then oppression and aggression
will be uprooted, threats will wither
away and no reason will remain for
conflict. This is a solid proposition
because most global conflicts emanate
from injustice, and from the powerful,
not being contented with their own
rights, striving to devour the
rights of others.

B.
Occupation of countries and exacerbation of hostilities

Occupation
of countries, including Iraq, has continued for the last three
years.

Not
a day goes by without hundreds of people getting killed in cold
blood. The occupiers are incapable of establishing security in
Iraq. Despite the establishment of the lawful Government and National
Assembly of Iraq, there are covert and overt efforts to heighten
insecurity, magnify and aggravate differences within Iraqi society,
and instigate civil strife.

There
is no indication that the occupiers have the necessary political
will to eliminate the sources of instability. Numerous terrorists
were apprehended by the Government of Iraq, only to be let loose
under various pretexts by the occupiers.

It
seems that intensification of hostilities and terrorism serves
as a pretext for the continued presence of foreign forces in Iraq.

Where
can the people of Iraq seek refuge, and from whom should the Government
of Iraq seek justice?

Who
can ensure Iraq's security? Insecurity in Iraq affects the entire
region.

Can
the Security Council play a role in restoring peace and security
in Iraq, while the occupiers are themselves permanent members
of the Council?

Can
the Security Council adopt a fair decision in this regard?

The
pretexts for the creation of the
[Israeli] regime occupying
Al-Qods Al-Sharif are so weak that its
proponents want to silence any voice
trying to merely speak about them,
as they are concerned that shedding
light on the facts would undermine the
raison d'etre of this regime, as it has.

Consider
the situation in Palestine:

The
roots of the Palestinian problem go back to the Second World War.
Under the pretext of protecting some of the survivors of that
War, the land of Palestine was occupied through war, aggression
and the displacement of millions of its inhabitants; it was placed
under the control of some of the War survivors, bringing even
larger population groups from elsewhere in the world, who had
not been even affected by the Second World War; and a government
was established in the territory of others with a population collected
from across the world at the expense of driving millions of the
rightful inhabitants of the land into a diaspora and homelessness.

This is a great tragedy with hardly a precedent in history. Refugees
continue to live in temporary refugee camps, and many have died
still hoping to one day return to their land. Can any logic, law
or legal reasoning justify this tragedy? Can any member of the
United Nations accept such a tragedy occurring in their own homeland?

The
pretexts for the creation of the regime occupying Al-Qods Al-Sharif
are so weak that its proponents want to silence any voice trying
to merely speak about them, as they are concerned that shedding
light on the facts would undermine the raison d'etre of this regime,
as it has. The tragedy does not end with the establishment of
a regime in the territory of others. Regrettably, from its inception,
that regime has been a constant source of threat and insecurity
in the Middle East region, waging war and spilling blood and impeding
the progress of regional countries, and has also been used by
some powers as an instrument of division, coercion, and pressure
on the people of the region. Reference to these historical realities
may cause some disquiet among supporters of this regime. But these
are sheer facts and not myth. History has unfolded before our
eyes.

Worst
yet, is the blanket and unwarranted support provided to this regime.
Just watch what is happening in the Palestinian land. People are
being bombarded in their own homes and their children murdered
in their own streets and alleys. But no authority, not even the
Security Council, can afford them any support or protection. Why?

At
the same time, a Government is formed democratically and through
the free choice of the electorate in a part of the Palestinian
territory. But instead of receiving the support of the so-called
champions of democracy, its Ministers and Members of Parliament
are illegally abducted and incarcerated in full view of the international
community.

Which
council or international organization stands up to protect this
brutally besieged Government? And why can't the Security Council
take any steps?

A
Government is formed democratically
and through the free choice of the
electorate in a part of the Palestinian
territory. But instead of receiving
the support of the so-called
champions of democracy, its Ministers
and Members of Parliament are
illegally abducted and incarcerated
in full view of the international
community. Which council or
international organization stands
up to protect this
brutally besieged Government?

Let
me here address Lebanon:

For
33 long days, the Lebanese lived under the barrage of fire and
bombs and close to 1.5 million of them were displaced; meanwhile
some members of the Security Council practically chose a path
that provided ample opportunity for the aggressor to achieve its
objectives militarily. We witnessed that the Security Council
of the United Nations was practically incapacitated by certain
powers to even call for a ceasefire. The Security Council sat
idly by for so many days, witnessing the cruel scenes of atrocities
against the Lebanese while tragedies such as Qana were persistently
repeated. Why?

In
all these cases, the answer is self-evident. When the power behind
the hostilities is itself a permanent member of the Security Council,
how then can this Council fulfill its responsibilities?

C.
Lack of respect for the rights of members of the international
community

I
now wish to refer to some of the grievances of the Iranian people
and speak to the injustices against them.

The
Islamic Republic of Iran is a member of the IAEA and is committed
to the NPT. All our nuclear activities are transparent, peaceful
and under the watchful eyes of IAEA inspectors. Why then are there
objections to our legally recognized rights? Which governments
object to these rights? Governments that themselves benefit from
nuclear energy and the fuel cycle. Some of them have abused nuclear
technology for non-peaceful ends including the production of nuclear
bombs, and some even have a bleak record of using them against
humanity.

Which
organization or Council should address these injustices? Is the
Security Council in a position to address them? Can it stop violations
of the inalienable rights of countries? Can it prevent certain
powers from impeding scientific progress of other countries?

The
abuse of the Security Council, as an instrument of threat and
coercion, is indeed a source of grave concern.

For
33 long days, the Lebanese
lived under the barrage of fire and
bombs and close to 1.5 million of them
were displaced; meanwhile some
members of the Security Council
practically chose a path that provided
ample opportunity for the aggressor
to achieve its objectives militarily.
We witnessed that the
Security Council of the
United Nations was practically
incapacitated by certain powers
to even call for a ceasefire.

Some
permanent members of the Security Council, even when they are
themselves parties to international disputes, conveniently threaten
others with the Security Council and declare, even before any
decision by the Council, the condemnation of their opponents by
the Council. The question is: what can justify such exploitation
of the Security Council, and doesn't it erode the credibility
and effectiveness of the Council? Can such behavior contribute
to the ability of the Council to maintain security?

A
review of the preceding historical realities would lead to the
conclusion that regrettably, justice has become a victim of force
and aggression.

Many
global arrangements have become unjust, discriminatory and irresponsible
as a result of undue pressure from some of the powerful.

Threats
with nuclear weapons and other instruments of war by some powers
have taken the place of respect for the rights of nations and
the maintenance and promotion of peace and tranquility;

For
some powers, claims of promotion of human rights and democracy
can only last as long as they can be used as instruments of pressure
and intimidation against other nations. But when it comes to the
interests of the claimants, concepts such as democracy, the right
of self-determination of nations, respect for the rights and intelligence
of peoples, international law and justice have no place or value.
This is blatantly manifested in the way the elected Government
of the Palestinian people is treated as well as in the support
extended to the Zionist regime. It does not matter if people are
murdered in Palestine, turned into refugees, captured, imprisoned
or besieged; that must not violate human rights.

When
the power behind the hostilities
is itself a permanent member of the
Security Council, how then can this
Council fulfill its responsibilities?

*
Nations are not equal in exercising their rights recognized by
international law. Enjoying these rights is dependent on the whim
of certain major powers.

*
Apparently the Security Council can only be used to ensure the
security and the rights of some big powers. But when the oppressed
are decimated under bombardment, the Security Council must remain
aloof and not even call for a ceasefire. Is this not a tragedy
of historic proportions for the Security Council, which is charged
with maintaining the security of countries?

*
The prevailing order of contemporary global interactions is such
that certain powers equate themselves with the international community,
and consider their decisions superseding that of over 180 countries.
They consider themselves the masters and rulers of the entire
world and other nations as only second class in the world order.

The
question needs to be asked: if the Governments of the United States
or the United Kingdom who are permanent members of the Security
Council, commit aggression, occupation and violation of international
law, which of the organs of the UN can take them to account? Can
a Council in which they are privileged members address their violations?
Has this ever happened? In fact, we have repeatedly seen the reverse.
If they have differences with a nation or state, they drag it
to the Security Council and as claimants, arrogate to themselves
simultaneously the roles of prosecutor, judge and executioner.
Is this a just order? Can there be a more vivid case of discrimination
and more clear evidence of injustice?

Regrettably,
the persistence of some hegemonic powers in imposing their exclusionist
policies on international decision making mechanisms, including
the Security Council, has resulted in a growing mistrust in global
public opinion, undermining the credibility and effectiveness
of this most universal system of collective security.

How
long can such a situation last in the world? It is evident that
the behavior of some powers constitutes the greatest challenge
before the Security Council, the entire organization and its affiliated
agencies.

The
question needs to be asked:
if the Governments of the
United States or the United Kingdom
who are permanent members of the
Security Council, commit aggression,
occupation and violation of
international law, which of the organs
of the UN can take them to account?

The
present structure and working methods of the Security Council,
which are legacies of the Second World War, are not responsive
to the expectations of the current generation and the contemporary
needs of humanity.

Today,
it is undeniable that the Security Council, most critically and
urgently, needs legitimacy and effectiveness. It must be acknowledged
that as long as the Council is unable to act on behalf of the
entire international community in a transparent, just and democratic
manner, it will neither be legitimate nor effective.

Furthermore,
the direct relation between the abuse of veto and the erosion
of the legitimacy and effectiveness of the Council has now been
clearly and undeniably established. We cannot, and should not,
expect the eradication, or even containment, of injustice, imposition
and oppression without reforming the structure and working methods
of the Council.

Is
it appropriate to expect this generation to submit to the decisions
and arrangements established over half a century ago? Doesn't
this generation or future generations have the right to decide
themselves about the world in which they want to live?

Today,
serious reform in the structure and working methods of the Security
Council is, more than ever before, necessary. Justice and democracy
dictate that the role of the General Assembly, as the highest
organ of the United Nations, must be respected. The General Assembly
can then, through appropriate mechanisms, take on the task of
reforming the Organization and particularly rescue the Security
Council from its current state. In the interim, the Non-Aligned
Movement, the Organization of the Islamic Conference and the African
continent should each have a representative as a permanent member
of the Security Council, with veto privilege. The resulting balance
would hopefully prevent further trampling of the rights of nations.

Today,
it is undeniable that the
Security Council, most critically
and urgently, needs legitimacy
and effectiveness. It must be
acknowledged that as long as the
Council is unable to act on behalf
of the entire international community
in a transparent, just and democratic
manner, it will neither be
legitimate nor effective.

It
is essential that spirituality and ethics find their rightful
place in international relations. Without ethics and spirituality,
attained in light of the teachings of Divine prophets, justice,
freedom and human rights cannot be guaranteed. Resolution of contemporary
human crises lies in observing ethics and spirituality and the
governance of righteous people of high competence and piety.

Should
respect for the rights of human beings become the predominant
objective, then injustice, ill-temperament, aggression and war
will fade away. Human beings are all God's creatures and are all
endowed with dignity and respect.

No
one has superiority over others. No individual or states can arrogate
to themselves special privileges, nor can they disregard the rights
of others and, through influence and pressure, position themselves
as the "international community".

Citizens
of Asia, Africa, Europe and America are all equal. Over six billion
inhabitants of the earth are all equal and worthy of respect.
Justice and protection of human dignity are the two pillars in
maintaining sustainable peace, security and tranquility in the
world. It is for this reason that we state: Sustainable peace
and tranquility in the world can only be attained through justice,
spirituality, ethics, compassion and respect for human dignity.
All nations and states are entitled to peace, progress and security.
We are all members of the international community and we are all
entitled to insist on the creation of a climate of compassion,
love and justice.

All
members of the United Nations are affected by both the bitter
and the sweet events and developments in today's world.

We
can adopt firm and logical decisions, thereby improving the prospects
of a better life for current and future generations.

Together,
we can eradicate the roots of bitter maladies and afflictions,
and instead, through the promotion of universal and lasting values
such as ethics, spirituality and justice, allow our nations to
taste the sweetness of a better future.

No
one has superiority over others.
No individual or states can arrogate
to themselves special privileges,
nor can they disregard the rights of
others and, through influence and
pressure, position themselves
as the "international community".

Peoples,
driven by their divine nature, intrinsically seek Good, Virtue,
Perfection and Beauty. Relying on our peoples, we can take giant
steps towards reform and pave the road for human perfection. Whether
we like it or not, justice, peace and virtue will sooner or later
prevail in the world with the will of Almighty God. It is imperative,
and also desirable, that we too contribute to the promotion of
justice and virtue.

The
Almighty and Merciful God, who is the Creator of the Universe,
is also its Lord and Ruler. Justice is His command. He commands
His creatures to support one another in Good, virtue and piety,
and not in decadence and corruption.

He
commands His creatures to enjoin one another to righteousness
and virtue and not to sin and transgression. All Divine prophets
from the Prophet Adam (peace be upon him) to the Prophet Moses
(peace be upon him), to the Prophet Jesus Christ (peace be upon
him), to the Prophet Mohammad (peace be upon him), have all called
humanity to monotheism, justice, brotherhood, love and compassion.
Is it not possible to build a better world based on monotheism,
justice, love and respect for the rights of human beings, and
thereby transform animosities into friendship?

I
emphatically declare that today's world, more than ever before,
longs for just and righteous people with love for all humanity;
and above all longs for the perfect righteous human being and
the real savior who has been promised to all peoples and who will
establish justice, peace and brotherhood on the planet.

0,
Almighty God, all men and women are Your creatures and You have
ordained their guidance and salvation. Bestow upon humanity that
thirsts for justice, the perfect human being promised to all by
You, and make us among his followers and among those who strive
for his return and his cause.